(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Annual Evaluation Report Fiscal Year 1984"

104-4

c*    Costs, Benefits, and Effectiveness  (Continued)

Funding Effects on Urban/Large LEAs: As a continuation to an analy-
sis reported last year of the fiscal effects of Chapter 2 on the 28
largest cities and districts (E,6)9 the Department supported an
analysis of second year Chapter 2 funding (E.7). Examining four
years of funding (two years prior to and two years of Chapter 2) for
the nation's largest cities and school districts9 the analysts found
smaller cuts in the two years since Chapter 2 than in the year prior
to its enactment* The reductions amounted to:

o   34% during the last 2 years of antecedent funding;

o   29% between the last antecedent year and the first year of Chapter

2; and
o   4% from the first to second year under Chapter 2.

Eleven of the 28 districts lost funds under both years of the block
grant. The dollar reductions are over ten times the size of the
gains (11 districts gained a total of $2.7 million while 17 districts
lost a total of $31.4 million), but no large district suffered !a cut
in any year greater than about 1% of its budget. The main deter-
minants of adverse fiscal effects were the presence and size of an
antecedent ESAA grant.

Desegregation Impacts: The most recent fiscal effects study (EĢ7)
reported that desegregation-related activities supported with Chapter
2 funds were planned in program year 1984-85 by 16 of 24 districts
which had ESAA grants in FY 1981 and two of four districts which
did not receive ESAA funds. Desegregation-related projects averaged
19% of Chapter 2 funding in these districts* ranging from 0% (in ten
districts) to 100% (in two districts).

Private School Participation Under Chapter 2: A recent paper (EĢ8)
on funding for services to private school students and LEA adminis-
trative practices concerning private school participation revealed
that the percentage of funds used for services to private school
students in 44 large LEAs ranged from 2 to 26%, with a mean of 13.5%.
In all but 6 of the 44 LEAs, the percentage of funds spent on private
school students was less than the percentage enrollment of such
students. On another item 16 of 29 LEAs indicated that funds received
under their States' high cost factors were not shared with private
school students, contrary to statutory requirements.

The Department lacks good information on how or whether LEAs are
fulfilling their responsibility to ensure private schools' nondiscrim-
inatory practices for Chapter 2 supported activities.vate school participation.                    593,042